Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39628819›Full record

ArticleJournal of contemporary brachytherapy2024

Electromagnetic tracking for integrated quality assurance in breast interstitial brachytherapy: The impact of registration method.

Birte Christina Sauer, Christopher Dürrbeck, Christoph Bert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of contemporary brachytherapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Birte Christina SauerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Uniklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany.
Christopher DürrbeckDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Uniklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany.
Christoph BertDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Uniklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Electromagnetic tracking (EMT) has great potential as a quality assurance tool in interstitial brachytherapy. Since its clinical application in most cases comprises a comparison with brachytherapy plan data, EMT registration and plan data are crucial. Registration uncertainties influence EMT outcomes and further decision-making processes. The impact of registration using four algorithms on the resulting data was investigated. Material and methods: Registration abilities of four sub-algorithms, which share the same principle of an iterative closest point approach were considered. Sub-algorithms differ regarding underlying mathematical norms, and also include a non-geometric implementation focusing on stochastic optimization. This study focused on the registration of point clouds originating from data obtained during treatment with interstitial brachytherapy in breast cancer patients. Data were acquired from a hybrid device prototype, capable of EMT measurements and data extracted from treatment plan. Main criteria for good registration performance were good geometric agreement, including low Euclidean distances between registered data sets as well as short registration time. In addition, previously published patient data with different than employed in the original publication algorithm were re-analyzed to further investigate the impact of registration method on clinically influential results. Results: The stochastic algorithm presented much higher registration times, and earliest implementation of geometric approaches occasionally misaligned patient data. The remaining two algorithms performed almost identically resulted in sufficiently accurate registration performance. The re-analysis of previously published data demonstrated minor inconsistencies between former registration method and different algorithm; however, the overall trends with almost identical mean Euclidean distance of 2.22 mm (2.19 mm in the original work) could be reproduced. Conclusions: The choice of registration algorithm can influence the quality of registration. Therefore, it is advised to regularly examine the registration performance, especially in in-house programs.

Indexed as

electromagnetic measurementimage registrationperformance optimization

Identifiers

PMID39628819
PMCPMC11609855

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.